ExxonMobil Spring Campus

[swtsig]

The latest project (Hughes Landing) will feature 1.5M SF of office buildings (with Exxon consolidating its world HQ in 500k SF there)

 

hmmmm...

[fernz]

hmmmm...

Where does your quote come from?

[cloud713]

Oh **** I hope it's true!

[swtsig]

bisnow... should've shown up in the quote box but didn't for some reason.

 

hard time believing this is anything more than a slip of the tongue based on a general assumption.

[cloud713]

Wait so you think biz now is assuming? Or your assuming they let the info slip?

And link to the article? I tried google searching with no luck

Edited January 31, 2014 by cloud713

[ClutchCity]

http://www.bisnow.com/commercial-real-estate/houston/748-put-down-those-butts/

I noticed it also. Things seem to be coming together.

[cloud713]

so was the info about the new workers in articles like this just a sham to fool people until they make an official announcement? i wonder how many people work at Exxon in Irving, and if its around 1,430 (the number the article quoted would be moving to Hughes Landing), or if the article was just making up numbers too.

http://www.houstonchronicle.com/business/real-estate/article/The-Woodlands-to-gain-Exxon-Mobil-workers-5063860.php

Edited January 31, 2014 by cloud713

[Montrose1100]

Hughes Landing reminds me of a modern Las Colinas.

 

It will be interesting to see how Springwood Village blends with the Campus. 

[King Owl]

Montrose1100 -

 

I work in Las Colinas...actually my office overlooks ExxonMobil's HQ.  The Woodlands is much, much nicer than here.  Las Colinas is nothing special at all, it's very suburban, is zoned to the terrible Irving ISD schools, and has bad traffic.  

[Houston19514]

so was the info about the new workers in articles like this just a sham to fool people until they make an official announcement? i wonder how many people work at Exxon in Irving, and if its around 1,430 (the number the article quoted would be moving to Hughes Landing), or if the article was just making up numbers too.

http://www.houstonchronicle.com/business/real-estate/article/The-Woodlands-to-gain-Exxon-Mobil-workers-5063860.php

 

IIRC, the current Irving HQ has less than 400 employees.

[Urbannizer]

 

 

The first of some 8,000 Houston-based employees will move from Exxon Mobil offices in the Greenspoint area in March, spokesman David Eglinton said. The remaining moves will be staggered over the following 15 months. About 2,000 workers who will relocate from the company's Fairfax, Va., offices are not due until next year. Exxon Mobil's corporate headquarters will remain in the Dallas suburb of Irving.

 

First occupants for Exxon Mobil campus due in March - Houston Chronicle

[HoustonIsHome]

Holy Mother of Scar on the Earth!!!

[Avossos]

We need to preserve more of our forrests

[por favor gracias]

We need to preserve more of our forrests

I wish Exxon would have built on the chunk of land closer to the freeway where there were hardly any trees to begin with. It's not like it's "secluded" in its current location.

[nativehoustonion]

I saw a comment on skyscraper.com that the ExxonMobile in Las Colinas is moving to Howard Hughes Landing. They said traffic is horrible. Bad schools , more international flights from IAH, and it is beautiful up there in The Woodlands.

[HoustonIsHome]

I saw a comment on skyscraper.com that the ExxonMobile in Las Colinas is moving to Howard Hughes Landing. They said traffic is horrible. Bad schools , more international flights from IAH, and it is beautiful up there in The Woodlands.

Hughes landing Would be interesting. Close to the main campus, but not actually in the campus.

I don't know why Any company would want to stay in DFW anyway. Lol, that should all move here

[cloud713]

[Mr. Mojito]

http://www.bizjournals.com/houston/blog/breaking-ground/2014/03/exclusive-bird-s-eye-view-of-exxon-mobil-campus.html

 

 

 

Developer Dirk Laukien, founder of Black Forest Ventures in the Woodlands, took me for a helicopter tour of the Woodlands and surrounding areas, and I was able to see what all of the fuss is about...

 

Irving, Texas-based Exxon currently is building its 385-acre campus south of the Woodlands in Springwoods Village. The campus will consist of about 20 office and specialty buildings, and at least 10,000 employees are expected to be working at the site by 2015.

 

 

 

 

 

 

I can't easily tell what, if any progress has been made in these pictures and the ones posted by Urbannizer at the begining of February.

Edited March 25, 2014 by Mr. Mojito

[rellott]

kinda reminds me of CIA HQ in Langley right now

[cloud713]

[Triton]

 

Not sure if it is out of the way, but you can actually drive back there now. It's open along the Springwoods Village road but the campus itself is still off limits.

[cloud713]

whattt? dang. wish i knew that. last time i tried driving back there Springwoods Village Blvd was closed. in that case, sorry for the mediocre pictures.. lol.

[Triton]

whattt? dang. wish i knew that. last time i tried driving back there Springwoods Village Blvd was closed. in that case, sorry for the mediocre pictures.. lol.

 

No worries! It's still good to get updates nonetheless. Yea, you can actually drive behind the SWN Energy building, the Springwoods Village town center area, and even onto Holzwarth over to the Grand Parkway.

[monarch]

oh my!  pretty soon, it's going to resemble a masterpiece.

[nonenadazilch]

In small bits and pieces, it's pretty cool, but overall, it's a bit... eery. Just seems so futuristic, but not in a cool kinda way, but rather in a "we're all going to be slaves to our corporate overlords" type of way. Good news, if fossil fuels die out and XOM hasn't changed enough to keep up with its peers, it could easily become a prison.

 

I agree, KinkaidAlum.  Ominously, it's not a matter of 'if' fossil fuels deplete.  World oil reserves are past peak volumes and countries like China are, graphically-speaking, on a geometrically increasing rate of consumption.  This easily gravitates towards off-topics like foreign policy and climate change, but to say the least, oil production vs consumption comes to a head sooner rather than later.  Your observation on Big Oil's potential & willingness to adapt is quite poignant.  If they choose not to, can you imagine how empty all the gleaming skyscrapers and fancy recent developments might get?  Nonetheless, Exxonmobil's campus is astounding.

 

Along with many others here, I'm also intrigued by new architecture and development as signs of both community progress and prosperity.  But i hope this fan base - with which i congenially associate - remains faithful to acknowledge (even if not publicly) that these brick-and-mortar creations are, ultimately, monuments to private and corporate wealth & power no matter how massive in scale they are in the suburbs or soaring in height downtown. 

 

A comfortable life in mainstream America no doubt cannot function without the employment opportunities and wage spectrum companies like Exxonmobil offer.  These benefits to a community deserve their rightful kudos.  But, high-paying, career-enriching jobs are the obvious, easiest to discern societal attributes of corporate America.  I only say we must guard against becoming overtly naive in dealing our fealty like many in these forums express.  If horrendously poor journalism sites like Hearst Corp.'s chron.com exemplify the declining media citizens rely upon for at least a novice awareness of large company happenings, we certainly serve ourselves well if we find other ways to stay keen to what's going on as a result of actions large companies make, particularly because their decisions and their increasing influence over our gov't can impact us so greatly & unwittingly. 

 

From all perspectives - commercial real estate, oil & gas industry, community booster - the images of the new Exxon campus stitching together weld by weld are compelling.  Somewhere in the midst of that invitingly collegial construct are offices for the company's treasury function from which many a well-earned paycheck disseminates.  The worthy employee, hard-pressed to anticipate inevitably cyclical layoffs or cutbacks, then circulates some of his wages into the local economy as he provides for himself & family a deservedly fine living.  The cascading benefits from Exxon's growth in north Houston are palpable.  Easy to see, right?  Easy for novice observers like us to acknowledge.     

 

But we have to stay mindful that - just as with any blue chip multinational - it's their bottom line that keeps singular focus on quarter-to-quarter profits, relegating virtually all other corporate matters.  Beyond the realm of right- or leftwing ideological views, we mustn't lose sight of the paradoxical fact that the same treasury offices in the woods of north Houston allocate massive corporate budgets for public relations (e.g., ubiquitous campaigns, charity events, fun runs that project images of "Everything's great!"), political action committees, and lobbyists that are commensurate with those profit goals first & foremost.  By corporate definition, we both gain & lose because companies exist solely to enrich its shareholders.  All other motives we as citizens might perceive are figments of their carefully honed image coupled with our naive brand loyalties.  So, naturally, there'll always exist the potential for conflicts between their goals and the priorities and welfare of the community, state, and/or country as a whole. 

 

I'm an eager enthusiast who cheers for local teams (I can't wait for October - go Rockets!).  So, I stand in awe of Big Oil's prominence here - be it Exxon's impressive fort coming together in our suburban woods or Chevron's towering ambitions downtown.  But as a patriotic citizen, I hope I'm one among many who stays vigilant of board room decisions that have far-reaching impact on my kids' futures, my neighbors, and hard-working families in all the countries in which Exxonmobil operates.

[H-Town Man]

I agree, KinkaidAlum.  Ominously, it's not a matter of 'if' fossil fuels deplete.  World oil reserves are past peak volumes and countries like China are, graphically-speaking, on a geometrically increasing rate of consumption.  This easily gravitates towards off-topics like foreign policy and climate change, but to say the least, oil production vs consumption comes to a head sooner rather than later.  Your observation on Big Oil's potential & willingness to adapt is quite poignant.  If they choose not to, can you imagine how empty all the gleaming skyscrapers and fancy recent developments might get?  Nonetheless, Exxonmobil's campus is astounding.

 

Along with many others here, I'm also intrigued by new architecture and development as signs of both community progress and prosperity.  But i hope this fan base - with which i congenially associate - remains faithful to acknowledge (even if not publicly) that these brick-and-mortar creations are, ultimately, monuments to private and corporate wealth & power no matter how massive in scale they are in the suburbs or soaring in height downtown. 

 

A comfortable life in mainstream America no doubt cannot function without the employment opportunities and wage spectrum companies like Exxonmobil offer.  These benefits to a community deserve their rightful kudos.  But, high-paying, career-enriching jobs are the obvious, easiest to discern societal attributes of corporate America.  I only say we must guard against becoming overtly naive in dealing our fealty like many in these forums express.  If horrendously poor journalism sites like Hearst Corp.'s chron.com exemplify the declining media citizens rely upon for at least a novice awareness of large company happenings, we certainly serve ourselves well if we find other ways to stay keen to what's going on as a result of actions large companies make, particularly because their decisions and their increasing influence over our gov't can impact us so greatly & unwittingly. 

 

From all perspectives - commercial real estate, oil & gas industry, community booster - the images of the new Exxon campus stitching together weld by weld are compelling.  Somewhere in the midst of that invitingly collegial construct are offices for the company's treasury function from which many a well-earned paycheck disseminates.  The worthy employee, hard-pressed to anticipate inevitably cyclical layoffs or cutbacks, then circulates some of his wages into the local economy as he provides for himself & family a deservedly fine living.  The cascading benefits from Exxon's growth in north Houston are palpable.  Easy to see, right?  Easy for novice observers like us to acknowledge.     

 

But we have to stay mindful that - just as with any blue chip multinational - it's their bottom line that keeps singular focus on quarter-to-quarter profits, relegating virtually all other corporate matters.  Beyond the realm of right- or leftwing ideological views, we mustn't lose sight of the paradoxical fact that the same treasury offices in the woods of north Houston allocate massive corporate budgets for public relations (e.g., ubiquitous campaigns, charity events, fun runs that project images of "Everything's great!"), political action committees, and lobbyists that are commensurate with those profit goals first & foremost.  By corporate definition, we both gain & lose because companies exist solely to enrich its shareholders.  All other motives we as citizens might perceive are figments of their carefully honed image coupled with our naive brand loyalties.  So, naturally, there'll always exist the potential for conflicts between their goals and the priorities and welfare of the community, state, and/or country as a whole. 

 

I'm an eager enthusiast who cheers for local teams (I can't wait for October - go Rockets!).  So, I stand in awe of Big Oil's prominence here - be it Exxon's impressive fort coming together in our suburban woods or Chevron's towering ambitions downtown.  But as a patriotic citizen, I hope I'm one among many who stays vigilant of board room decisions that have far-reaching impact on my kids' futures, my neighbors, and hard-working families in all the countries in which Exxonmobil operates.

 

It may be worth remembering that peak oil has a roughly 50 year history of prophecy, and that while there is a finite amount of oil in the earth, we have only extracted a small portion of it due to technological limitations. Even in Texas, after a century of drilling, we've extracted well less than half of what's down there.  Fracking is one little breakthrough allowing us to extract more; one might imagine a future where other occasional breakthroughs continually postpone the dire end, well past our lifetimes.

 

And the phrase "geometrically increasing rate of consumption" hearkens back to Thomas Malthus and his prediction in 1798 that world food needs were increasing geometrically (i.e. exponentially) while food supply was only increasing arithmetically (linear), thus leading to a world starvation scenario in the very near future. Of course, that never happened, thanks to technology.

 

Edited May 22, 2014 by H-Town Man

[Timoric]

-

Edited July 8, 2019 by Timoric

[strickn]

I wonder how they can have studied hundreds of the best campus settings, designing for urban and collegial feel, and have missed the obvious fact that if you want those feelings you don't have one architect do the whole place.

[Triton]

Shielded by trees

2014-06-06 16.59.28 by marclongoria, on Flickr

 

2014-06-06 16.57.46 by marclongoria, on Flickr

[TBooze]

Of course in some cosmic sense there is some fixed amount of oil in total but that isn't a practical way to understand this issue because no one knows exactly how much that is because of a simple economic reality.

 

There are vastly different amounts of oil available based on the cost of retrieving that oil.

 

Oil won't be searched for and brought to market if producing it costs $20 a barrel and it will only sell for $10 a barrel - AKA 1987 in Texas. 

 

Whereas when producing it at say $60 a barrel and selling it at $100 will cover your costs then that will yeild more oil being sold that wasn't worth going after when the price was only $10.

 

Therefore, the amount of oil that may "run out" isn't really known in any practical sense since it changes all the time based on prices. I don't think anyone knows that we have peaked in oil production since big oil discoveries are happening all the time and places we think there is oil are off limits in some cases.

 

If someone takes a snapshot of proven reserves they read someplace then divide that by how much oil is consumed every day and comes up with a number they are promoting an economic fallacy because the proven reserves could be twice that much 10 years later depending on technology, access to untapped resources, and new discoveries and prices.

 

The fallacy is that the number "proven reserves' never changes or is final and we are taking from a known fixed pie right now and will run out.

 

Great take on the subject of oil reserves. I agree with 99% of your posting and the only reason it isn't 100% is because the last sentence is a bit confusing, and perhaps its just my inability to comprehend fully what you mean by it.

There is a "known" amount of "proven reserves". This known amount tends to change due to discoveries from exploratory efforts by Big Oil. As technology improves, which happens rapidly today compared to even 10 years ago, it becomes increasingly more cost effective to explore. We have only just begun to explore ultra deep water fields, meaning 20k to 25k feet of water, for instance. There is a goldmine there, and when technological advancements allow us to efficiently drill in deeper waters, we'll explore there as well.

What is also true is that there is a finite amount of black gold in the earth. These reserves will not be depleted in our lifetime, but it doesn't mean that Big Oil hasn't already begun to prepare for the inevitable. I work at XOM and am privy to some of the preparation already underway. I'm sure our competitors are doing the same. Those buildings at the campus will be filled for a long time to come. XOM has the ability to pay some of the smartest people in the world very well to ensure that it will continue to be at the top of the food chain.